Militia seizes Federal building

To DQ -

Well, he launched the parallel as a counterattack.

Does he think or believe they're exactly alike?

Probably not, but firing off the counterargument at all implies equivalency.

 

It's only tradition, because it allows the president to escape any political fallout resulting from the pardon.

For me, it's better this way. If the public thinks the President is acting improper, we have a means of expressing that, at the ballot box.

Bill Clinton would have never pardoned Marc Rich is he still had to stand for election.

Obama didn't commute the sentence of Oscar López Rivera -- an unrepentant terrorist, who refused to renounce his acts of terror, which is why he didn't get out of jail under Clinton -- when he did it out of a sake of tradition. He did it at the end of his term so he wouldn't have to answer for it.

And, it a pardon is warranted, I'm not sure why someone should remain in jail, simply to satisfy some tradition.

 

To serve some jail time? Maybe that's how you earn the pardon.

I suspect he'll be pardoning them in advance before long.

 

How much jail time did Marc Rich serve?

 

Except that none of those things are "the exact same."

 

Well, I'd argue with you, but I know you don't follow the news closely, so I'm sure this is true, in your mind.

 

Give me a little time and I'll fi d some links.

 

On April 6, 2018, Jeff Sessions announced the administrations new zero-tolerance policy, which is weird, since what they were doing was already exactly the same as what Obama was doing before.

 

Maybe Eric Holder will run for president, and he can explain his role in the Marc Rich pardon:

How Eric Holder Facilitated the Most Unjust Presidential Pardon in American History

 

Marc Rich is probably the worst overstep in the history of presidential pardons.

Is that really going to be your point of comparison for every other pardon in presidential history?

 

Here's Jeff Sessions, announcing his new policy, which apparently was exactly the same as the old policy.

 

"So, tell me why democrats, liberals, and male feminists in Hollywood are outraged by "kids in cages" under Trump, but weren't when Obama put them in cages." ~ YF

One, there *was* outrage. Two, not that many people really heard about it because Three, Obama didn't set a policy of taking babies away from their parents and throwing them in baby jail to the tune of a couple of thousand in six weeks.